Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ProfessorCirno" data-source="post: 5510594" data-attributes="member: 65637">I feel both 3e and 4e (and 2e and all the editions before that) are fairly awful at simulating any type of &quot;real world&quot; or even &quot;medieval world plus magic.&quot;I do, however, feel that 4e &quot;simulates&quot; genres far better then 3e does.The consistency argument is somewhat of a non-statement, in that what counts as consistent and what doesn't is left to the viewer.&nbsp; The same goes for verisimilitude - 3e broke my verisimilitude far more then 4e does, to give the example.Thus the issue - when I'm told that 4e &quot;breaks verisimilitude,&quot; my instinctual thought is &quot;How could it ever break it more then 3e did?&quot;&nbsp; Which, uh, generally isn't the response that's expected <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue&nbsp; &nbsp; :p"&nbsp; data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="ProfessorCirno, post: 5510594, member: 65637"] I feel both 3e and 4e (and 2e and all the editions before that) are fairly awful at simulating any type of "real world" or even "medieval world plus magic." I do, however, feel that 4e "simulates" [I]genres[/I] far better then 3e does. The consistency argument is somewhat of a non-statement, in that what counts as consistent and what doesn't is left to the viewer. The same goes for verisimilitude - 3e broke my verisimilitude far more then 4e does, to give the example. Thus the issue - when I'm told that 4e "breaks verisimilitude," my instinctual thought is "How could it ever break it more then 3e did?" Which, uh, generally isn't the response that's expected :p [/QUOTE]

Verification